Research validation

Lincoln and Guba (Lincoln et al., 2011) highlight apparent avoidance of ‘critical scrutiny’ as one of the key criticisms of qualitative approaches. Qualitative research has received criticism with reference to its validity, due to the absence of standardised and universally

87 accepted validation criteria (Kvale, 1996; Morse, 1999; Robson, 2002). However, as the nature of the phenomenon being investigated has a bearing on its philosophical position it can be questioned whether studies conducted within different philosophical traditions should adopt the traditional validation criteria used in positivist studies (Gioia and Pitre, 1990; Love et al., 1993; Healy and Perry, 2000). Despite this argument, it is important to establish issues such as reliability and validity of research during a research study regardless of whatever philosophical stand point the researcher believes (Easterby-Smith

et al., 2008). Regardless of the researcher’s heavy involvement in the research, qualitative researchers must make an effort to establish the reliability and credibility of results in order to make an impression on the reader (Silverman, 2001).

Regardless of popularity of case study method as a distinct form of empirical inquiry, it has been criticised by the research community as a less desirable form of inquiry than other research approaches (Yin, 2009). In order to overcome such criticisms, the development of the case study design needs to be maximised for conditions related to design quality, namely (i) construct validity, (ii) internal validity, (iii) external validity and (iv) reliability (Yin, 2009).

Construct validity is concerned with establishing correct operational measures for the concepts being studied (Miles and Hurberman, 1994; Yin, 2009). Specifically, this measure is largely based on whether the data collection instrumentation was appropriate for the research. In this research, construct validity was achieved by triangulation of research techniques. In addition to the triangulation attained using multiple sources of data as explained within Section 3.5.1, triangulation by theories was achieved when conducting the literature review, through the integration of different streams of literature. Furthermore, maintaining a chain of evidence throughout the research improved the construct validity.

The internal validity has to be established at the data analysis stage by ensuring that data analysis techniques were applied correctly and the theoretical propositions were appropriately linked to the data during data analysis. Thus, establishing internal validity involves “establishing a causal relationship, whereby certain conditions are believed to

88 Internal validity was addressed in this research in several ways. First, the careful choice of research design enabled the choice of an appropriate research approach and techniques based on the nested model. Second, by providing research objectives and theoretical frameworks for this study and by developing them progressively during the literature review, the research direction and focus were achieved.

The external validity indicates the extent to which research findings can be generalised and establishes the domain to which a study’s findings can be generalised. Using replication logic in the multiple case studies satisfies this external validity. Yin (2009) emphasises that case studies are generalisable to theoretical propositions but not to populations or universe: case studies lead to analytical generalisation rather than statistical generalisation. In multiple case studies, if two or more cases support the same theory, replication may be claimed and thereby ‘cross-case generalisation’ can be achieved. In this context, this research relied on analytical generalisation over statistical generalisation as case studies do. The findings of this study can therefore be generalised to the case study population and further, the use of multiple case studies facilitates cross-case generalisation and thus enable generalising of the findings to the context.

Reliability was also established during the data collection phase of this research. Reliability means “demonstrating that the operations of study, such as data collection

procedures can be repeated, with the same results” (Yin, 2009: p.40). Within the scope of this research, operations were carried out as detailed in the Section 3.4.1, ensuring transparency and enhancing reliability. During the case study phase, with the assistance of the NVivo software, case study protocol and case study database were maintained. Using case study protocol, explanation about every step followed during the data collection and all material used during data collection was recorded. The case study database was used to organise and document the data collected for case studies.

3.7

Summary and link

This chapter presented and justified the research methodology adhered to during the PhD research process. In doing so, how the research philosophy, approach and techniques were positioned to address the research problem of the study was discussed within this chapter.

89 This study adopts the social constructionism view in terms of its philosophical assumptions and the case study approach was selected as the main research approach. The data was collected through semi-structured interviews from 20 experts within the construction partnering field and within the two selected case studies. These interviews were analysed using two qualitative data analysis techniques called content analysis and cognitive mapping. The chapter concluded with a discussion on the validation of this study. The next chapter presents the empirical data analysis and synthesis of cultural and behavioural challenges within construction partnering projects.

90